Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm not questioning that. I'm just saying that if one of
> LH_LINUX_PACKAGES cannot be installed, it shouldn't continue to generate
> the image.
that is a problem with aptitude. aptitude does ignore non-existing
packages and thus not fail; whereas apt-get does this. afaik,
On 16/10/07 at 07:02 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > I'm not sure I understand how: people with custom kernels could just set
> > LH_LINUX_PACKAGES to "", no?
>
> it would be 'none', not "", otherwise it gets set to the default.
>
> however; checking for unionfs or aufs c
On 15/10/07 at 16:58 -0400, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 10:09:04PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > On 15/10/07 at 21:09 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > > Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > > Why not stop in that case?
> > >
> > > because it would unecessarily block people with custom
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand how: people with custom kernels could just set
> LH_LINUX_PACKAGES to "", no?
it would be 'none', not "", otherwise it gets set to the default.
however; checking for unionfs or aufs cannot be made reliable; you can't
know how the user is implement
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 10:09:04PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 15/10/07 at 21:09 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > Why not stop in that case?
> >
> > because it would unecessarily block people with custom kernels.
>
> I'm not sure I understand how: people with cus
On 15/10/07 at 21:09 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Why not stop in that case?
>
> because it would unecessarily block people with custom kernels.
I'm not sure I understand how: people with custom kernels could just set
LH_LINUX_PACKAGES to "", no?
Also, I really think
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Why not stop in that case?
because it would unecessarily block people with custom kernels.
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/
--
On 15/10/07 at 10:02 -0400, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 01:10:37PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > On 15/10/07 at 12:30 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > > severity 446731 important
> > >
> > > Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > > I use unionfs, but ran into the same problem with aufs.
tags 446731 +pending
forcemerge 446731 446306
thanks
Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Until Daniel makes the next upload, setting --union-filesystem aufs
> doesn't update LH_LINUX_PACKAGES; you need to manually pass
> --linux-packages 'linux-image-2.6 aufs-modules-2.6 squashfs-modulues-2.6'
which happens t
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 01:10:37PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 15/10/07 at 12:30 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > severity 446731 important
> >
> > Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > I use unionfs, but ran into the same problem with aufs.
> >
> > did you also adjust LH_LINUX_PACKAGES, not just LH_
On 15/10/07 at 12:30 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> severity 446731 important
>
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > I use unionfs, but ran into the same problem with aufs.
>
> did you also adjust LH_LINUX_PACKAGES, not just LH_UNION_FILESYSTEM?
I have:
LH_LINUX_PACKAGES="linux-image-2.6 unionfs-modules-
severity 446731 important
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I use unionfs, but ran into the same problem with aufs.
did you also adjust LH_LINUX_PACKAGES, not just LH_UNION_FILESYSTEM?
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet:
Package: live-helper
Version: 1.0~a31-1
Severity: serious
Hi,
My usb-hdd config, which used to work not so long ago, doesn't work
anymore.
I use unionfs, but ran into the same problem with aufs.
My host is a lenny system, with some unstable packages. I tried
live-helper a31 and a29. (a29 worked
13 matches
Mail list logo
